try to hear me out here…
are partial squats at a heavier weight, like way heavier weight- more effective than full range rom squats at a lighter weight? im speaking of BELT SQUATS specifically - so the weakest link is not what weight your upper body can support, it’s all legs.
I have noticed better recovery from partial squats and better glute development though it could just be because im finally taxing the fully contracted position
I replied in your post about dips that partial are all the rage now.
I have seen this done on Youtube. One guy claims he recovers better. Maybe? I would be afraid of getting hemorrhoids.
He also uses them on other exercises like dips. Some people might get hurt others won’t. In the long run who knows? The same guy is selling a book and bootleg Mentzer t-shirts
If your go as deep in the belt squat that is safe for you and come up and don’t look your knees it think that’s overall more effective.
You’ll recover better and be less sore from anything that causes less muscle damage. I’m definitely less sore from heavier, top-half squats than lighter ATG squats. Effective probably depends on your goals.
well the point is that im able to hip lift a weight that is heavier than my deadlift,
Work up to 2.8 times your deadlift.
no it’s only a little more than my deadlift like 1.5x
which is not bad since your deadlift is always more than your squat, so your glutes are getting less stimulus than a top partial belt squat
This is exactly what I thought. Recovering better could be an indicator its less effective.
I would agree that partials are great when working on a sticking point in powerlifting attempts. But that said it’s still a secondary (accessory) excercise. I would still prefer full range movements, which can be varied into infinity. An emphasize on negatives will make everything else redundant, in my opinion.
But, then again, Zone Training (Jreps) seem to have merit.
no, you can lift more in the top range from leverages, the muscles still ‘feel’ the same tension with heavier near the top as they do with less weight near the bottom. Plus, longer muscle length tension seems to be more stimulating than short range since at longer ranges, the muscle can actually generate more tension due to optimal crossbridge attachments.
More effective for what ? Glutes, quads…?
Typically true except for the strong squatters, who can squat, in some cases, much more than they can deadlift.
I was able squat more than deadlift…by 30 lbs
This was more common than not in the 1970’s as only powerlifters did the deadlift and only serious weight lifters squatted. Everybody did the Bench Press. Plus some “Bi’s and Tri’s for the girls”
Only if you’re doing them with the proper ROM… meaning in the stretched position.
So yeah, sure. Do bottom ROM only squats to failure. I dont see why that would be problematic at all.
explain why do bottom rom only if whatever your using for the bottom rom is completable in the top rom why skip the top rom? this is some sam sulek shit
Partial ROM at length is proven more effective than at contraction, so there’s that.
I avoid the very bottom of the squat, where my hips start to tip under and I buttwink. I don’t consider this to be partial ROM, but full ROM as determined by my level of mobility. My recommendation would be to only go as low as you can with your bodyweight, if you’re only getting into certain positions because the barbell is pushing you there, it’s probably going to give some kind of knee, hips or lower back issues in the future. There are other exercises I can do that will put my quads into more of a stretched position (or an extreme stretch as seen in Fortitude and DC Training) but I won’t force myself into that position if a particular movement doesn’t lend itself to an extreme stretch.
glutes seem to take a better shape i guess. im going to set up a negative squat situation where i dip and squat out the positive portion and slowly lower myself back down.
this is using a belt squat. im fully taxing the muscles in their strongest rom
